Disaster Management Act, 2005 – s.11 – National Plan – COVID-19 – Pandemic – A Public Interest Litigation filed in the wake of COVID-19 pandemic seeking direction to the Union of India to prepare, notify and implement a National Plan u/s. 11 r/w. s.10 of the Act, 2005 to deal with current pandemic (COVID-19) – Petitioner submitted that National Plan uploaded on the website of National Disaster Management Authority of the year 2019 does not deal with situations arising out of the current pandemic and has no mention of measures like lockdown, containment zones, social distancing etc. – Held: The first National Plan u/s. 11 was framed in the year 2016, which was revised and the National Plan was prepared and notified in November, 2019 – National Plan and guidelines as contemplated by the statute for Disaster Management is by its very nature prior to the occurrence of any disaster and as a measure of preparedness – It is not conceivable that a National Plan would be framed after the disaster has occurred – A National Plan encompasses and contemplate all kinds of disasters – The Biological and Public health emergencies has already been contemplated in the National Plan, 2019, which as notified in table 1-1 under paragraph 1.13.1 specifically includes epidemics: Viral, Bacterial, Parasitic, Fungal and prior infections – Novel Coronavirus is an epidemic which has become pandemic – Plan2019 is complemented by several plans, Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), manuals, Guidelines at all levels of the Government – Further, the National Disaster Management Authority had issued guidelines in the year 2008 itself which has been further detailed in Plan-2019 – All aspects of the epidemics, all measures to contain an epidemic, preparedness, response, mitigation have been elaborately dealt in Plan-2019 – The Disaster Management Act, 2005 contain ample powers and measures, which can be taken by the National Disaster Management Authority, National Executive Committee and Central Government to prepare further plans, guidelines and Standard Operating Procedure (SOPs), which in respect to COVID-19 have done from time to time – Containment Plan for COVID-19 was also issued – There are no lack of guidelines, SOPs and Plan to contain COVID-19 — Nodal Ministry has brought on record updated containment plan for large outbreaks of COVID19 – Guidelines and orders have been issued from time to time to regulate all measures to contain COVID-19 – Thus, there is no merit in the submission of the petitioner that there is no sufficient plan to deal with COVID-19 pandemic – National Plan, 2019 have been there in place supplemented by various orders and measures taken by competent authorities under Disaster Management Act, 2005, there is no occasion or need to issue any direction to Union of India to prepare a fresh National Plan for COVID-19. Disaster Management Act, 2005 – s.12 – Guidelines for Minimum Standards of Relief – COVID-19 – Pandemic – A public interest litigation filed in wake of COVID-19 pandemic, seeking direction to the Union of India to lay down minimum standards of relief u/s. 12 of the Act, 2005 to be provided to persons affected with COVID-19 – The petitioner pleaded that Centre should come up with detailed guidelines recommending the minimum standards of relief to be provided in the relief camps in relation to shelter, food, drinking water, medical cover and sanitation, in absence of which, shelter homes and relief camps are susceptible of becoming hotbeds for the spread of COVID-19 infection – It was further pleaded that the Centre should come up with detailed guidelines under s.12(ii) and (iii) of Act, 2005 for widows and orphans and ex-gratia assistance to be provided to the kith and kin of those losing life because of COVID-19 infections but also as a result of harsh lockdown restrictions – It was also submitted that there are no guidelines providing for minimum standards of relief for COVID19 – Held: The respondent has brought on record the guidelines which were in existence before declaration of COVID-19 pandemic and it covers all statutory requirement as enumerated in s.12 – The uniform guidelines are contemplated so that persons affected by disaster are provided with minimum requirement in the relief camps in respect of shelter, food, drinking water, medical cover and sanitation and other reliefs as contemplated in the section – There being already guidelines for minimum standards in place even before COVID-19, the said guidelines for minimum standards holds good even for those who are affected by COVID-19 – Further, Government of India has treated COVID-19 as a notified disaster for the purpose of providing assistance under State Disaster Response Fund, norms of assistance for ex-gratia payment to families of deceased persons and other assistance – Therefore, Union of India is not obliged to lay down minimum standard of relief u/s.12 and guidelines issued u/s.12 providing for minimum standards of relief holds good for pandemic COVID-19 also.
Disaster Management Act, 2005 – s. 46 – National Disaster Response Fund – COVID-19 – Pandemic – Public Interest Litigation – The submissions of the petitioner centre around National Disaster Response Fund (NDRF) and PM CARES Fund – It was submitted that the earlier guidelines for administration of NDRF which came into force with effect from financial year 2010-11 have been modified by new guidelines with effect from financial year 2015-16, and now it is not possible for any person or institution to make contribution to the NDRF and it was further submitted that deletion of paragraph 5.5 of earlier guidelines makes it clear that it is not possible for any person or institution to make any contribution to NDRF – It was contended that paragraph 5.5 of the earlier guidelines was deleted to benefit the PM CARES Fund – Held: New guidelines contain the same heading, i.e. ‘Contribution to the NDRF’ and guideline 5.2 provides ‘Funds will be credited into the NDRF in accordance with the provisions of the s. 46(1)(a) & (b) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 – The above guideline
5.2 specifically referred to s. 46(1)(a) & (b) and s. 46(1)(b) expressly provides that any grants that may be made by any person or institution for the purpose of disaster management shall be credited to NDRF – Thus, the submission that it is not possible for any person or institution to make any contribution to the NDRF is incorrect – So, any contribution, grant of any individual or institution is not prohibited to be credited into the NDRF and it is still open for any person or institution to make contribution to the NDRF in terms of s. 46(1)(b) of the Act, 2005 – Further, the contribution by any person or by any institution in PM CARES Fund is voluntary and it is open for any person or institution to make contribution to the PM CARES Fund.
Disaster Management Act, 2005 – s. 46 – COVID-19 – Pandemic – NDRF and PM CARES Fund – Public Interest Litigation – After outbreak of Pandemic COVID-19, need of having a dedicated national fund with objective of dealing with any kind of emergency or distress situation, like posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, a fund was created, namely, PM CARES Fund – It was contended that all the contributions/ grants from individuals/institutions to be credited in NDRF and not to PM CARES Fund and all the funds collected in PM CARES Fund till date should be directed to be transferred to NDRF – Held: As per the new guidelines, 2015-16 expenditure from NDRF is meant to assist a State to provide immediate relief in those cases of severe calamity, where the expenditure required is in excess of the balance in the State’s SDRMF – The Centre has released first intalment of Rs.11,092/- crores out of 22,184/- crores which was the Central share of SDRMF and there is nothing on record that any State has exceeded the expenditure in excess of the balance in the State’s SDMRF, there is no occasion of asking more fund by the State from NDRF – Whereas, the PM CARES Fund has been constituted as a public charitable trust in the year 2020 – Under the guidelines which were in existence with effect from financial year 2015-16, neither NDRF nor SDRMF covered the bioligical and public health emergencies – No contribution by any person or institution in the NDRF could have been made prior to the notification dated 14.03.2002, which notified COVID-19 as disaster – The outbreak of COVID-19 required immediate enhancement in the infrastructure of medical health and creation of fund to contain COVID-19 – PM CARES Fund was constituted to have necessary financial resources to meet the emergent situation – The NDRF and PM CARES Fund are two entirely different funds with different object and purpose – The funds collected in the PM CARES are funds of a public charitable trust and there is no occasion for issuing any direction to transfer the said funds to the NDRF. Dismissing the writ petition, the Court
HELD: 1. I) Whether the Union of India under Section 11 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, is obliged to prepare, notify and implement a National Disaster Management Plan specifically for pandemic COVID-19 irrespective of National Disaster Management Plan notified in November, 2019?
1.1 The Biological and Public Health Emergencies has already been contemplated in the National Plan, 2019, which as noticed in table 1-1 under paragraph 1.13.1 specifically includes epidemics: Viral, Bacterial, Parasitic, Fungal and prion infections. Novel Coronavirus is an epidemic which has become a pandemic. [Para 36][454-C]
1.2 Thus, the National Disaster Management Authority was well aware of the epidemics and had issued guidelines in the year 2008 itself which has been further detailed in Plan-2019. All aspects of the epidemics, all measures to contain an epidemic, preparedness, response, mitigation have been elaborately dealt in Plan, 2019. Unless the National Plan as contemplated under Section 11 contains all aspects of disaster including the Biological and Public Health Emergencies, it will not be possible for the Governments to immediately respond and contain an epidemic. [Para 38][454-H; 455-A]
1.3 The Disaster Management Act, 2005 contain ample powers and measures, which can be taken by the National Disaster Management Authority, National Executive Committee and Central Government to prepare further plans, guidelines and Standard Operating Procedure (SOPs), which in respect to COVID-19 have been done from time to time. Containment Plan for Novel Coronavirus, 2019 has been issued by Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, copy of which updated up to 16.05.2020 has been brought on record as Annexure-R4. There are no lack of guidelines, SOPs and Plan to contain COVID-19, by Nodal Ministry and Annexure R-6 has been brought on record issued by Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, i.e., Updated Containment Plan for Large Outbreaks Novel Coronavirus Disease, 2019 (COVID-19). [Para 39][455-B-D]
1.4 National Executive Committee as well as Nodal Ministry has issued guidelines and orders from time to time to regulate all measures to contain COVID-19. The petitioners are not right in their submissions that there is no sufficient plan to deal with COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 being a Biological and Public Health Emergency, which has been specifically covered by National Plan, 2019, which is supplemented by various plans, guidelines and measures, there is no lack or dearth of plans and procedures to deal with COVID-19. [Para 40][455-E]
1.5 This Court does not find any merit in the claim of the petitioner that Union of India be directed to prepare a National Plan under Section 11 for COVID-19. National Plan, 2019 have already been there in place supplemented by various orders and measures taken by competent authorities under Disaster Management Act, 2005, there is no occasion or need to issue any direction to Union of India to prepare a fresh National Plan for COVID-19. Thus, the Union of India is not obliged to prepare, notify and implement a fresh National Disaster Management Plan for COVID-19. [Para 42][456-A-B]
2. II) Whether the Union of India was obliged to lay down the minimum standards of relief under Section 12 of Act, 2005, for COVID-19 irrespective of earlier guidelines issued under Section 12 of the Act laying down the minimum standards of relief?
2.1 The guidelines brought on record which were in existence since before declaration of COVID-19 pandemic, covers all statutory requirement as enumerated in Section 12. Section 12 contemplates minimum standards of relief to be provided to persons affected by disaster. The word ‘disaster’ mentioned in Section 12 encompasses all the disasters including the present disaster. Section 12 does not contemplate that there shall be different guidelines for minimum standards of relief for different disasters. [Para 45][457-D-E]
2.2 The uniform guidelines are contemplated so that persons affected by disaster are provided with minimum requirement in the relief camps in respect of shelter, food, drinking water, medical cover and sanitation and other reliefs as contemplated in the section. There being already guidelines for minimum standards in place even before COVID-19, the said guidelines for minimum standards holds good even for those who are affected by COVID-19. Section 12 does not contemplate that afresh guidelines for the minimum standards of relief be issued with regard to COVID-19. The prayer of the petitioner to direct the Union of India to issue fresh guidelines under Section 12 to be provided to persons infected with COVID-19 is misconceived. [Para 46][457-F-G]
3. (III) Whether Union of India is obliged to utilise National Disaster Response Fund created under Section 46 of the Act for the purpose of providing assistance in the fight of COVID-19? IV) Whether all the contributions/grants from individuals and institutions should be credited to the NDRF in terms of Section 46(1)(b) of the Act rather than PM CARES Fund? V) Whether all the funds collected in the PM CARES Fund till date be directed to be transferred to the NDRF?
3.1 All the three questions being inter-related are taken together. The submissions of the petitioner centre around National Disaster Response Fund (NDRF) and PM CARES Fund. [Para 49][458-E]
3.2 The guidelines for administration of the NDRF have been revised with effect from financial year 2015-16 which have been brought on record. As per paragraph 10 of the new guidelines, expenditure from NDRF is meant to assist a State to provide immediate relief in those cases of severe calamity, where the expenditure required is in excess of the balance in the State’s SDRF. The NDRF is a statutory fund required to be audited by the Comptroller & Auditor General of India, which was constituted under Act, 2005 and is still in existence for the purposes as enumerated in the statute as well as in the guidelines issued under Act, 2005. [Paras 55 and 57][461-D-E; 462-D-E]
3.3 The PM CARES Fund has been constituted as a public charitable trust. After outbreak of pandemic COVID-19, need of having a dedicated national fund with objective of dealing with any kind of emergency or distress situation, like posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, and to provide relief to the affected, a fund was created by constituting a trust with Prime Minister as an ex-officio Chairman of PM CARES Fund, with other ex-officio and nominated Trustees of the Fund. The PM CARES Fund consists entirely of voluntary contributions from individuals/organisations and does not get any Budgetary support. No Government money is credited in the PM CARES Fund. [Para 59][464-A-C]
3.4 Firstly, paragraph 5.5 of earlier guidelines which contemplated contributions by any person or institution for the purpose of disaster management to the NDRF are very much still there in the new guidelines, which have come into force with effect from financial year 2015-16. New guidelines contain the same heading, i.e., “Contribution to the NDRF” and guideline
5.2 provides “Funds will be credited into the NDRF in accordance with the provisions of the Section 46(1)(a) & (b) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.” The above guideline 5.2 specifically referred to Section 46(1)(a) & (b) and Section 46(1)(b) expressly provides that any grants that may be made by any person or institution for the purpose of disaster management shall be credited into the NDRF. The submission that after the new guidelines, it is not possible for any person or institution to make any contribution to the NDRF is, thus, misconceived and incorrect. According to the statutory provisions of Section 46 as well as new guidelines enforced with effect from financial year 2015-16 any person or institution can still make contribution to the NDRF. [Para 61][464-F-H; 465-A]
3.5 Secondly, the PM CARES Fund has been constituted in the year 2020 after outbreak of pandemic COVID-19 whereas the new guidelines came into force with effect from 2015-16, on which date the PM CARES Fund was not in existence, hence, the submission that new guidelines were amended to benefit the PM CARES Fund is wholly misconceived. [Para 62][465-B]
3.6 After issuance of the notification, the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs (Disaster Management Division) issued order of 03.04.2020 on the subject: “Advance release of Central share from State Disaster Risk Management Fund (SDRMF) for the year 2020-21”. By the said order the Central Government has released first instalment of Rs. 11,092/- crores out of Rs.22,184/- crores which was the Central Share of SDRMF. All States have been allocated different amounts for the purpose of providing assistance under SDRMF. Annexure to the said notification is at page 161, which indicates that maximum grant allocated was to the State of Maharashtra as Rs.1,611/- crores as first instalment and minimum amount to State of Goa, i.e., Rs.6/- crores by the Centre. The notification dated 14.03.2020 clearly permits providing the assistance under SDRMF for COVID-19. In event, any State expenditure is in excess of the balance in the State’s SDRMF, the State is entitled for the release of fund from NDRF as it is clear from new guidelines filed. The submission of the petitioner that NDRF cannot be used for any assistance for COVID-19, thus, cannot be accepted. There is one more aspect of the matter which needs to be noted. When the Centre is providing financial assistance to the State to take measures to contain COVID-19, as this Court has noticed above that by order dated 03.04.2020 first instalment of Rs. 11,092/crores which is the Central Share to the SDRMF has been given and there is nothing on record that any State has exceeded the expenditure in excess of the balance in the State’s SDRMF, there is no occasion of asking more fund by the State from NDRF. When the Central Government is providing financial assistance to the States to contain COVID-19 it is not for any PIL petitioner to say that Centre should give amount from this fund or that fund. The financial planning is in the domain of the Central Government, which financial planning is made after due deliberation and consideration. This Court thus, does not find any substance in the submission of the petitioner that there is any statutory restriction/prohibition in utilization of NDRF for COVID-19. More so when sub-section (2) of Section 46 specifically provides that NDRF shall be made available to the National Executive Committee to be applied towards meeting the expenses for emergency response, relief and rehabilitation in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Central Government, the NDRF can be used for containment of COVID-19. [Paras 64 and 65][466F-H; 467-A-E]
3.7 The guidelines which were issued for constitution and administration of NDRF and State’s SDRMF, the guidelines provided utilization of fund for limited calamities, which did not include any biological and public health emergency. This Court has already noticed Clause 3.1 of guidelines for administration of NDRF, which did not provide for the calamities which cover the biological and public health emergency. Thus, under the guidelines which were in existence with effect from financial year 2015-16 neither NDRF nor SDRF covered the biological and public health emergencies. It was only by notification dated 14.03.2020 that COVID-19 was treated as notified disaster for the purpose of providing assistance under SDRF. Obviously prior to this notification dated 14.03.2020 no contribution by any person or institution in the NDRF could have been made with respect to specified disaster, namely, biological and public health emergency like COVID-19, Outbreak of COVID-19 in India as well as other countries of the World required immediate enhancement in the infrastructure of medical health and creation of fund to contain COVID-19. At this need of the hour no exception can be taken to the constitution of a public charitable trust, namely, PM CARES Fund to have necessary financial resources to meet the emergent situation. [Para 71][468-F-H; 469-A-B]
3.8 The NDRF and PM CARES Fund are two entirely different funds with different object and purpose. In view of the foregoing discussions, the question Nos.3, 4 and 5 are answered in following manner:
Answer 3. The Union of India can very well utilize the NDRF for providing assistance in the fight of COVID-19 pandemic by way of releasing fund on the request of the States as per new guidelines.
Answer 4. Any contribution, grant of any individual or institution is not prohibited to be credited into the NDRF and it is still open for any person or institution to make contribution to the NDRF in terms of Section 46(1)(b) of the Act, 2005. The contribution by any person or by any institution in PM CARES Fund is voluntary and it is open for any person or institution to make contribution to the PM CARES Fund.
Answer 5. The funds collected in the PM CARES Fund are entirely different funds which are funds of a public charitable trust and there is no occasion for issuing any direction to transfer the said funds to the NDRF. [Para 72][469-C-F]
Swaraj Abhiyan v. Union of India & Ors., (2016) 7 SCC 498 – referred to.
Gaurav Kumar Bansal v. Union of India and Ors., (2017) 6 SCC 730; Mulla Gulam Ali & Safiabai D. Trust v. Deelip Kumar & Co., (2003) 11 SCC 772 – relied on.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.